Could "I was sat in a chair" be grammatical if the form of 'sitting' is the transitive one?Eg:(An adult talking about a time he was 3 years old)"At the cottage, my parents had a choice of how to seat us three kids. There was an orange chair, a blue chair, a stool, and a bench. Sister got the bench. Big brother was forced to takethe stool. As for me, I was sat on a chair, the blue one".Or should it be "I was seated"?

I had the same score and it appears I missed the same question. I suspect Hilary is some freakish British hermaphrodite, some hideous Glen or Glennda drinking tea and wearing a tail-coat on one half and a frilly gown on the other. Revolting.

Millennium:10/10, but I only knew Hilary's gender because I've seen that question before, and I still don't get how the answer makes any sense.

Comma placement for restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses. I've taught this material on two continents and the question is a bunch of malarkey anyway. Nobody cares about that guy's sissy brother.

AlanSmithee:Could "I was sat in a chair" be grammatical if the form of 'sitting' is the transitive one?Eg:(An adult talking about a time he was 3 years old)"At the cottage, my parents had a choice of how to seat us three kids. There was an orange chair, a blue chair, a stool, and a bench. Sister got the bench. Big brother was forced to takethe stool. As for me, I was sat on a chair, the blue one".Or should it be "I was seated"?

The correct form would be, "I was ensat upon yon chair, blue, both in hue and mood."

AngryJailhouseFistfark:AlanSmithee: Could "I was sat in a chair" be grammatical if the form of 'sitting' is the transitive one?Eg:(An adult talking about a time he was 3 years old)"At the cottage, my parents had a choice of how to seat us three kids. There was an orange chair, a blue chair, a stool, and a bench. Sister got the bench. Big brother was forced to takethe stool. As for me, I was sat on a chair, the blue one".Or should it be "I was seated"?

The correct form would be, "I was ensat upon yon chair, blue, both in hue and mood."

OH MOTHERfarkINGshiatASSGODDAMMIT!!! I screwed that up. Should be: "I was ensat upon yon chair, blue, both in hue and humour."

manimal2878:Of course, there are no rules for English. Everything that follows is debatable.

Which is why arguing about grammar is stupid. Grammar is supposed to describe how language is used by a group of people, if they start using it differently, the "rules" of grammar change.

It doesn't work that way for all languages, some become quite incomprehensible if you get your grammars wrong. English has a ridiculously flexible structure in comparison to most languages, which makes it easy to learn. As a result of that, it absorbs words from other languages very easily, which means the spelling of various sounds is wildly inconsistent, making it hard to learn. As a result of that absorption, it also has about twice the vocabulary of most languages, giving it shades of meaning a lot of languages find it hard to express. Not many make the distinction between house and home, for example.The lack of flexibility in pronunciation or structure is also why Chinese will never become the dominant global language. Pronounce it badly, and innocent phrases like, "grass mud horse" turn into, "fark your mother". That is an actual example, which is why, as a result of the Chinese blogosphere, you can buy plush grass mud horses.